Ideas for my CI and Passion Blog

There are so many different issues to talk about that it is difficult to just pin down two potential candidates for my Civic Issue blog. Despite this, there is one issue that is definitely in the running. I believe that the single most important issue facing our generation today is that of the environment. The fact of the matter is that if something is not done in the near future then the world that our children live in may not be recognizable to us, and this terrifies me. It seems that every week there are new reports coming out about how the situation is even worse than we previously thought, and that immediate and drastic action must be taken to curtail it. This is coming at a time when our president considers climate change to be a hoax, and when his own administration comes out with reports that say otherwise he ignores them.  

Speaking of our elected officials, my second choice for my blog is discussing the overly polarized nature of American “party politics.” I know that it is expected that our elected officials not agree on everything, but in recent years this has risen to truly ridiculous heights. Now even the media is taking part, only presenting the facts that support what they want to believe. If I chose this as my blog topic then I would analyze how various media outlets and individuals present the same incident in wildly different manners and how this affects us as consumers. While this problem may not be on the same scale as the environmental issues that we face, it is nonetheless extremely important. The way things sit now it is difficult to trust any information you receive regardless of the source, which is a very difficult situation to be in.

Regarding my passion blog, last semester I wrote about various myths and how some of them originated in fact or have real-world equivalents. The only problem with this is that I tried to choose more well-known examples but I am starting to run out of them. Generally speaking I think that for this sort of topic it is much more enjoyable for the audience if they recognize what I am talking about as opposed to me having to provide them with a detailed background. To compensate for this if I stay with this topic I may expand the scope to include things like some of the better-known urban legends. The other possible idea I have for my passion blog is perhaps reviewing shows and/or movies on Netflix. I’ve always been interested in writing some sort of review of a show, movie or book and this seems like a good opportunity to expand upon this.

Posted in Rcl

What Have I Learned This Semester?

Before this class I had a vague idea of what rhetoric was. I knew that it was the art of speaking in such a way that you would convince the argument of your point. But the actual application of it eluded me. In fact, one of the things I had hoped to gain from this class was better public speaking ability. I think one of the ways through which this class helped me do that was through our analysis of what rhetoric actually is. Once you understand what something is you can apply it much more effectively.

One of the things I never quite connected before this class was how similar rhetoric is to propaganda. It always seemed to me that propaganda was much more base while rhetoric was more sophisticated. While this may be true to some extent, I didn’t realize to what extent propaganda actually uses rhetoric. I think that approaching my speeches and arguments almost as if they were propaganda and trying to sell the listener/reader on my point makes them much stronger.

As far as civic life goes, I didn’t really even know it was a term before this class. At the start of the semester I didn’t even know what the “Civic Life” part of “Rhetoric and Civic life” really entailed. But it appears that you can’t really talk about one without talking about the other because of how connected they are. Most times it seems that rhetoric is actually being used to change how people approach civic life. For example, politicians use rhetoric to convince their constituents on how to vote. Prior to Rcl I did not grasp this connection, which in hindsight I realize is a very important one and is maybe the single most important thing I learned in the class. By realizing the connection between rhetoric and propaganda and then learning the connection between rhetoric and civic life, I am prompted to look much more critically at what public figures such as politicians tell me since it is now obvious that they are really just trying to sell us something. The skills gained in this class will allow me to glean far more from articles and speeches than I would ever have been able to prior.

Posted in Rcl

Public Controversy Outline Thus Far

Outline

 

 

  • Introduction- begin with opening question- should guns be banned or not?

 

      1. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
        1. Do research about original intention of the 2nd amendment
          1. Source explains the problem with the wording
      2. Up until relatively recently gun control was not even much of an issue
      3. Introduce framing questions
        1. Should guns be banned? How have the different stances evolved over time? How have different events through history shaped this debate? Specifically, how have politics, gun violence and technology caused different views and opinions to emerge and/or evolve? We want to explore how views on gun control have changed over time in response to these factors. Especially how certain kairotic moments are able to catalyze discussion about gun control and legislation.
      4. Timeline of gun control legislation (historical, 1791-2000)

 

  • Body : 2000-2018

 

      1. NRA + legislation (political causes)
        1. Impact of the NRA- how the NRA prevented the 2013 Assault weapons ban even though the public supported it.
        2. Economic (motivations of NRA)
        3. Explain how this shaped current viewpoints
      2. shootings/crime
        1. Crime wave of the 60s/70s
        2. When the shootings started to be discussed (Columbine, etc.)
        3. Explain how this shaped current viewpoints
      3. Guns have changed (technology)
        1. Explain how this shaped main points
      4. Current viewpoints (where we are at the present moment)
        1. Ban guns, some control, no/very limited control
        2. Compare to other countries (possibly?)
        3. Explain how each of the main points shaped the debate over time

 

  • Conclusion– balancing scale with the two sides, finish with a question like: to ban guns or not?

 

 

Script

Introduction

Voice-over: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Image: bill of rights

Voice-over: “In 1971, the Bill of Rights was ratified and the second amendment guaranteed the right to bear arms. However, in recent years, new questions have arisen. Perhaps the biggest is: should guns be banned or not?”

Image: ?

Voice-over: “Of course, the second amendment was written in a very different time period, in a very different context. Since its ratification, there have been many events and factors that have played affected the issue of gun control.”

Image: ?

Voice-over: “The big question is how guns should be controlled. How have the different stances evolved over time? How have different historical events shaped this debate? Specifically, how have politics, gun violence and technology caused different views and opinions to emerge and/or change? How have kairotic moments been important in catalyzing discussion about gun control and relevant legislation?

Image: ?

Voice-over: “The first piece of nation gun control legislation was the National Firearms Act. This mostly came in response to crime as part of FDR’s “New Deal for Crime.” It imposed tax on the manufacturing, selling and transporting of certain firearms.”

Image: FDR, headlines about NFA

Voice-over: “A few years later, the Federal Firearms Act required manufacturers and dealers to obtain a license and defined a group of people who could not purchase guns, such as convicted felons.”  what caused this to be enacted?

Image: ?

Voice-over: “The Supreme Court case United States v. Miller led the court to state “we cannot say the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument” (the short barrel shotgun).”

Image: Supreme Court, short barrel shotgun

Also: Gun control Act of 1968 in response to assassinations, Firearm Owners Protection Act in 1986, 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act named after James Brady, assault weapons ban in 1994…

Potential sources for timeline: 1, 2, 3, 4

Transition

 

Posted in Rcl

TED Talk

The TED talk that I watched is titled “The art of misdirection.” It features Apollo Robbin, ostensibly the greatest pickpocket in the world, as he shows the crowd how easy it is to misdirect people by controlling their attention. At first he explains this concept academically by likening your sense of attention to a security guard within you brain named Frank. Robbin discusses how Frank’s resources are finite and how he can be distracted. However, Robbin goes on to choose a member of the crowd as an example of the concepts that he has just explained. Over the next few minutes Robbin consistently tricks this hapless old man in a good-natured sort of way to demonstrate how easy it is. By the end, he has taken the man’s watch, money, and miscellaneous items (including a shrimp that was in his pocket) without this guy even realizing it. Finally, to close the talk Robbin asks the crowd what he is wearing, at which time the entire crowd realises that he has changed his outfit during the talk without them even noticing.

I have seen multiple TED talks before, but this one is easily the one that engages with the audience the most. Now obviously, the subject matter of this specific talk is particularly well-suited to include the audience. But the fact is that having the audience participate in your talk – even in a much more limited capacity than what is shown in this video – is a very effective way of making your talk more interesting. This may be especially true if your subject matter is particularly dense because it ensures that the audience’s interest is kept high.

Overall this talk did a great job of keeping the audience involved and interested. The speaker picked a tone that worked for his subject – lighthearted and playful – and stuck with it throughout the talk, which ended up being very successful.

Posted in Rcl

Paradigm Shifts

The paradigm shift that I am currently thinking about writing my essay on is the amount and type of involvement people think the government should have in their everyday lives. Thousands of years ago it was accepted across virtually every culture (with certain notable exceptions such as Athens and Rome when it was a republic) that there be a ruler with absolute authority over his subject. To be fair, a large reason for this was the idea of divine right; or that rulers were chosen by the gods and therefore should have ultimate power. However, the fact remains that it took thousands of years before even the concept of checking the power of a king or emperor was conceived.

Over time new branches of government were created, such as the parliament in Britain, and along with their creation came the checks and balances they brought. With this came a shift in the mindset of the general populace, where they still viewed the aristocracy as being superior but not to the same extent as previously. Furthermore, with the emergence of democracy and the idea of a presidency, any previous reverence that the general population held towards its leaders vanished due to the fact that they change so often and at the whims of the people.

To research this I would have to look at ancient cultures and their attitudes and ideas about government. Most likely I would focus on Europe and the U.S (since for most of its history it was primarily populated by European immigrants) so I could establish a better and more consistent timeline. I would also try to analyze the way that American society has shifted over the last few centuries in terms of how much power we want to give the government over our personal lives.

Posted in Rcl

Civic Artifact Essay Rough Draft

Perhaps the single most iconic piece of American propaganda is the “I Want YOU” poster that depicts Uncle Sam pointing at the viewer and asking them to join the army. This poster was circulated during WWI, but has been adopted numerous times since then in a variety of ways. The poster was one of 46 created by James Flagg, who was one of multiple illustrators creating propaganda at the time. This raises the question: why was this poster specifically so much more successful than the others that it was competing against? When there were so many dozens of posters created, what made this one stand out so much that it is known a century after the fact? The answer lies in two parts; the first being that this iconic image comes from a well-respected figure, captures the widespread commonplace of patriotism, and panders to the viewers sense of self-importance. The second reason it was and continues to be so successful is its simplicity; there is very little contextualization needed to understand the message behind the image.

The man depicted in the image is Uncle Sam, who is essentially the incarnation of the nation itself. Although before this image Uncle Sam had been depicted primarily in a cartoonish manner – tall and gawky, oftentimes doing something satirical – in this poster he is drawn more realistically and looks to be more muscular and serious. The celebrity status combined with his newfound look lends Uncle Sam a powerful tool: credibility. Even though he is a fictional character, the viewer will still subconsciously thinks of Uncle Sam as being a reliable source. This is further reinforced by the fact that Uncle Sam is wearing red, white, and blue which further go to show his dedication to the country.

During WWI the citizens of the U.S wanted to present a united front to the rest of the world. What this meant was that patriotism was considered to be one of the greatest possible virtues, and people were extremely enthusiastic in expressing their patriotism. One of the best ways for a citizen to show how patriotic they are is to join the army, making the timing of this poster very kairotic. In addition, as mentioned earlier, Uncle Sam is the archetypal representation of the U.S and its ideals. How can the viewer consider themselves a patriot if they deny him in his time of need? This makes the viewer feel as though they have to enlist, and attempts to make them feel guilty if they do not.

This poster also plays to something that may not be part of the classical appeals, but is very effective nonetheless. Humans have a naturally inflated opinion of themselves. If 1,000 people are asked if they are above average intelligence, almost all of them will say yes even though this is extremely unlikely. In the same vein, people are always seeking to validate their overinflated notion of self. What this poster does is that it implies that the country needs “YOU,” the viewer, specifically. While this is obviously not true, and the viewer will know that this is untrue in a logical sense, they will still subconsciously react to it. In all likelihood one random recruit is unlikely to change the outcome of the war, but people are loath to admit to their own relative insignificance. Instead the viewer will likely focus on the slim chance that they are pivotal to the war effort, and this will occupy the majority of their thoughts. From there it is a natural next step for them to sign up for the army.

Not only are the things that the poster does contain important, but also are the those that it does not. The above paragraph discussed how the viewer knows that part of the poster’s message is untrue from a logical perspective. For this reason, there is no real appeal to logos present in the poster. An appeal to logos would dilute what is present. Rather, the image deals in shock and awe by singling the viewer out and making them feel important, while also making them feel as though it is their patriotic duty to contribute. The problem is, neither of these things are true. If the poster added a logical argument to what is already present, then it forces the viewer to think logically in order to comprehend and understand that argument. And if the viewer does that then they may very well start to think logically about the other arguments, and soon realize that they do not hold much water.

Undoubtedly this poster has many of the components required to comprise an effective civic artifact. But, it was only one of 46 such posters created by one man. Why was it so much more successful than its contemporaries? The only way to determine this is to examine other posters created by James Flagg, and learn why they fell by the wayside as this poster continued to thrive over the decades.

One such poster depicts Uncle Sam staring directly at the viewer, hands on hips, stating, “I am telling you. On June 28th I expect you to enlist in the army of war savers to back up my army of fighters.” This poster bears many obvious similarities to the first one; it too uses Uncle Sam to lend itself a sense of credibility and invoke patriotism, uses the word “you” to appeal to the readers narcissism, and doesn’t waste time with a logical argument. But the significance is not in the similarities, but rather in the differences.

This first difference may seem silly, but is actually extremely important. As mentioned earlier, Flagg was one of the first authors to draw Uncle Sam as a more serious figure, as is clearly shown in the first poster. He is a broad, imposing man with an air of importance; basically the type of person that an American citizen should strive to emulate. However, this is not the case in the second image. In this image, Uncle Sam looks overly serious, in an impractical pose and with a strange facial expression. While these may seem like minor points, both of these images rely on Uncle Sam to give them credibility. While it works in the first poster, the exact opposite effect is created for the second. The very figure that was meant to make the poster seem trustworthy to the audience instead serves as a point of ridicule, which is one of the worst possible outcomes.

The second issue may also seem relatively trivial at first glance. The first poster is very concise and to the point, consisting of just one short sentence and a compelling image. The second poster on other hand has a significantly less compelling image, but also around four times as many words. This means that it is not nearly as effective. The primary strength of a poster is that it grabs the attention of the viewer in some way and makes its point quickly and efficiently. Oftentimes people won’t stop to even fully read a poster, but just glance at it in passing. The first poster would still have been effective in that scenario because its message was concise and its imagery powerful, but this second poster has a longer, less effective message and significantly weaker imagery.

There is one final reason why the first poster has been so successful not just when it was first printed, but in the decades after. The language that it uses is just so widely applicable. It requires no contextualisation, as soon as the viewer reads it they understand what is being said without needing any background knowledge. The other poster, is not nearly as general. It mentions things such as, “the war savers” which makes it unlikely that it will ever be used past a couple years after first printing. While this difference probably did not play a crucial role in the initial success of the, “I Want YOU” poster, it was most definitely pivotal in the longer term.

While both posters utilized many of the same ideals and made many of the same appeals, the first poster did so in a much more efficient manner. By using more compelling imagery and more concise and widely applicable wording the first poster ensures that it endures through the decades while its companions fall by the wayside.

 

Posted in Rcl

Civil Artifact Essay Intro

Perhaps the single most iconic piece of American propaganda is the “I Want YOU” poster that depicts Uncle Sam pointing at the viewer and asking them to join the army. This poster was circulated during WWI, but has been adopted numerous times since then in a variety of ways. The poster was one of 46 created by James Flagg, who was one of multiple illustrators creating propaganda at the time. This raises the question: why was this poster specifically so much more successful than the others that it was competing against? When there were so many dozens of posters created, what made this one stand out so much that it is known nearly a century after the fact? The answer is that it hits every single one of Aristotle’s pleas – ethos, pathos, logos, and kairos – but also appeals to the viewer in more subtle, psychological ways.

 

Posted in Rcl

Civic Artifact Outline

The civic artifact that I chose is the iconic “I Want You” poster.

 

Introduction

  • Author is James Flagg
  • This is one of 46 posters he created for WWI
  • The poster is actually a combination of used ideas
    • The pose is borrowed from a 1914 British recruitment picture
      • The British poster depicted Lord Kitchener (Secretary of War) pointing at the viewer and saying “Your Country Needs YOU”
    • Obviously the poster depicts Uncle Sam
      • Uncle Sam was already a well-established figure at this time
      • He represented the U.S itself and its ideals

 

Uncle Sam

  • Prior to this poster Uncle Sam had been primarily depicted as a cartoon character
  • Flagg veered away from the classic depiction
    • He instead gave him a more muscular and attractive frame
      • Interestingly enough, Flagg didn’t have anyone to model the new and improved Uncle Sam for him; so he used his own face and just added facial hair and aged it
    • This makes the viewer want to emulate Uncle Sam as he seems like the perfect American citizen
    • Leads me to believe that the target audience was white males
      • They would have been those who identified the best with Uncle Sam, making him the most effective for this audience
      • Given the time period, white males also would have been seen as the most desirable recruits for the army
  • The fact that the poster appears to be coming from Uncle Sam, the archetypal embodiment of American ideals, gives it impressive ethos

 

Pathos

  • The poster appeals appeals to pathos in a number of ways
  • This was a time in which many Americans felt we had to present a united front against the rest of the world
    • This meant that patriotism would have been one of the most vaunted ideals in society
      • How could the viewer call themselves a patriot if they refuse the call of Uncle Sam, who is representing the country itself
      • Guilt-trips the viewer into enlisting
  • The poster also plays into the viewer’s sense of self-importance
    • It seems to single out the viewer and speak specifically to you, both with the pose and the words
    • This makes the viewer feel important, and makes them think that the country needs them specifically to win the war
Posted in Rcl

Kairos of “I Want YOU” Poster

In my last post I discussed the iconic “I Want YOU” poster that depicts Uncle Sam pointing at the reader and indicating that they should enlist in the U.S army. This poster was created during WWI by James Flagg, and kairos was obviously a driving element to it.

 

Image result for i want you poster

As we discussed in class, various issues wax and wane as they are brought in and out of the spotlight. Prime examples of this are gun control and terrorism; they are always being discussed but are really brought to the forefront when there is a shooting or terrorist attack. Now, the poster being discussed doesn’t have much to do with these topics, but the point it does address is the military. The military is a topic similar to gun control or terrorism in that it has massive spikes in how much it is being discussed. Obviously during WWI it would have been one of the most pressing issues at the time.

Most people at the time the poster was created had favorable views of the military, and even those who didn’t would still have thought it necessary. What this means is that it was a very kairotic moment for this poster to be created, as people would have viewed joining the military as a patriotic duty.

Not only does this poster address the military, but by using Uncle Sam as the speaker it has patriotic implications as well. If the reader refuses Uncle Sam’s call then they are shown to be unpatriotic since Uncle Sam represents the country itself. And during this time period a patriot was one of the best things a person could be. Again, this means that it was a very kairotic moment for this poster to be printed. Every element of this poster was intentionally included because it would appeal to the reader, and kairos was the driving force behind it.

Posted in Rcl

“I Want YOU!”

Perhaps the single most iconic example of propaganda of all time is the “I Want YOU” poster that served as an inspirational call to arms during World War I. It depicts Uncle Sam, the incarnation of America and representation of all its ideals, pointing at the viewer and expressing his wish for you to join the army. This historic poster appeals to the commonplace that is patriotism, which is being achieved in this instance through military service.

People are inherently narcissistic. If you ask 1,000 people whether they are above average intelligence the majority of them will say yes, although this cannot be true by definition of the word “average.” That is perhaps another reason why this poster has been so successful; it caters to people’s vanity and validates it. You have Uncle Sam, representing all of the United States of America, asking specifically for you! This is perhaps one of the most powerful methods of persuasion, make someone feel like they are the only one that can help and they are much more likely to do so.

This poster actually appears numerous times throughout history, just not always with the exact same content. The general idea remains the same, it depicts Uncle Sam (or some equally iconic figure) saying, “I want YOU.” This is then followed by whatever the poster is trying to motivate the reader to do, whether it be joining the army, vaccinating your children, or cleaning up your room.

Everyone, no matter their walk of life, shares the need to be valued, and that is what this poster addresses which is why it is so powerful.  

Posted in Rcl